Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

100 Years of Mystery: The strange Case of Alfred Hitchcock's Missing Film 'Number 13'
Far Out Magazine ^ | FRI 1ST JUL 2022 | Mick McStarkey

Posted on 07/02/2022 9:59:29 AM PDT by nickcarraway

Alfred Hitchcock changed the shape and trajectory of cinema with titles such as The 39 Steps, North by Northwest, Rear Window, and Psycho. His fascinating, semi-voyeuristic account of the human condition set the form on a completely different course that was to open it up to future auteurs such as Stanley Kubrick and Andrei Tarkovsky, helping to create the incredibly complex medium it is today.

It was now more cerebral and delved into the complex, Jungian recesses of the psyche, exploring death, murder, and sex in a forensic way that had never been done before. It’s indicative of the pioneering quality of Hitchcock’s work that he remains so pertinent today over 40 long years after his passing.

For much of his career, Hitchcock was celebrated as the very best in the game, but it wasn’t always like this. As with anyone striving to become the finest in their chosen occupation, the director worked tirelessly in his rise to prominence, cutting numerous flicks before he finally gained his ultimate goal, global success as a master of cinema.

The first of these was 1922’s Number 13. It came as Hitchcock was awarded his first shot at directing for Gainsborough Pictures, but although it is considered the auteur’s first feature film, it has an odd story. It was never released and, subsequently, became a missing movie.

The worrying story of Alfred Hitchcock “stalking” Tippi Hedren Read More

Not one person, that we know of, has ever seen the film, and even the most enlightened Hitchcock historians are perplexed by it. Information surrounding the project is beyond scarce. For years, the film has fascinated film historians and fans, as a handful of production stills have survived, including one that shows a youthful Hitchcock in action outside the Angel pub in Rotherhithe, London. These pictures suggest that Hitchcock did make the film, or at least part of it, but apart from these, every trace of it has disappeared.

What we do know about the film is that the narrative followed the story of a set of poor residents who lived in a house funded by The Peabody Trust, which was founded by the famous American banker-philanthropist George Foster Peabody. Added to the intrigue is that stars of the silver screen, Clare Greet and Ernest Thesiger, were cast as unnamed husband and wife.

We also know that Number 13 was written by Anita Ross, a staff member at Islington Studios. In the lengthy interview Hitchcock gave to François Truffaut, which became the 1967 book Hitchcock/Truffaut, the director revealed that Ross claimed to have some form of professional association with the biggest star of the day, Charlie Chaplin, but he never elucidated on this.

Given that 2022 is the centenary of Number 13, the search for more information about the abandoned project has new impetus. The main aim is to find the film, meaning that we’ll be able to understand how Hitchcock developed as a director.

At the time of Number 13‘s production, Hitchcock, who was in his early 20s, was desperate to make his mark on the world. Prior to the film, Hitchcock had been working for the American company Famous Players-Lasky, the precursor to Paramount, at its London base in Islington. Hitchcock’s job involved designing title cards and managing the artistic direction of films. Learning the trade quickly, he became the most in-the-know at the company, eclipsing the veterans who had been in the business years.

So, at the time of Number 13, Hitchcock was really coming into his own, and this is what has surprised historians and fans most, puzzling them about why production was stopped on the film. He rarely discussed it in interviews, but once, when he described it as a “somewhat chastening experience”, inferring that things didn’t go to plan.

I’d suggest that it was something to do with financing. The last piece of information we know is that Clare Greet financed the production with her own funds, and that before her, Hitchcock’s uncle, John, also provided money to get it off the ground, which indicates that the studio wasn’t backing the production financially, or that Hitchcock was having trouble bringing Ross’s story to life.

Interestingly, Hitchcock felt so indebted to Greet for her charity, that she then appeared in six of his films, The Ring (1927), The Manxman (1929), Murder! (1930), The Man Who Knew Too Much (1934), Sabotage(1936), and Jamaica Inn (1939).

One day, I hope the footage of Number 13 is discovered, as this short tale is utterly intriguing.


TOPICS: TV/Movies
KEYWORDS: alfredhitchcock; hitchcock; number13

1 posted on 07/02/2022 9:59:29 AM PDT by nickcarraway
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: nickcarraway

I’ve got it. Unfortunately it’s on VHS


2 posted on 07/02/2022 10:17:18 AM PDT by j.havenfarm (21 years on Free Republic, 12/10/21! More than 5000 replies and still not shutting up!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: nickcarraway
Something like 90% of films made before 1930 are lost forever. One of the main reasons is the unstable, highly flammable nitrate film stock used at the time. Even if it doesn't catch fire, it will slowly "rot" in the film cans.

3 posted on 07/02/2022 10:24:57 AM PDT by Governor Dinwiddie (LORD, grant thy people grace to withstand the temptations of the world, the flesh, and the devil.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: All

Shadow of a Doubt is Hitchcock’s best film


4 posted on 07/02/2022 10:32:14 AM PDT by escapefromboston (Free Chauvin)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: nickcarraway

How can someone who earns his living as a writer not know the difference between the words imply and infer?


5 posted on 07/02/2022 10:35:56 AM PDT by ladyjane
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: escapefromboston

That was his personal favorite.


6 posted on 07/02/2022 10:37:27 AM PDT by nickcarraway
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Governor Dinwiddie
Something like 90% of films made before 1930 are lost forever. One of the main reasons is the unstable, highly flammable nitrate film stock used at the time

Shoshanna and Mercel are another reason, but it was for an ingloriously good cause.

7 posted on 07/02/2022 10:44:34 AM PDT by Ahithophel (Communication is an art form susceptible to sudden technical failure)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: ladyjane
How can someone who earns his living as a writer not know the difference between the words imply and infer?

And irregardless of how much d'ems earn as a writer accept when they except charity from the Read Cross.

8 posted on 07/02/2022 10:47:29 AM PDT by Ahithophel (Communication is an art form susceptible to sudden technical failure)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Ahithophel

You know what they say:

Those things are a diamond-dozen in this doggy-dog world.


9 posted on 07/02/2022 10:53:11 AM PDT by Kriggerel ("All great truths are hard and bitter, but lies... are sweeter than wild honey" (Ragnar Redbeard))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Kriggerel

Well excuse me while I kiss this guy.


10 posted on 07/02/2022 10:56:39 AM PDT by Ahithophel (Communication is an art form susceptible to sudden technical failure)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: ladyjane
“How can someone who earns his living as a writer not know the difference between the words imply and infer?“

Which of the words should of the author used? PS: Did you mean to write how may someone…?

:)

11 posted on 07/02/2022 11:23:36 AM PDT by Born in 1950 (Anti left, nothing else.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Governor Dinwiddie

#3 Some new movies should be put on nitrate film stock !!


12 posted on 07/02/2022 9:09:14 PM PDT by minnesota_bound (Need more money to buy everything now)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: ladyjane

Spelling auto correct and poor proof reading.


13 posted on 07/02/2022 9:11:32 PM PDT by Rebelbase (Crush, smash and obliterate the Liberal New World Order)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson